14- Reforms And Alternatives To The Jury System

Question 1

List 4 possible reforms to the current jury system.

Answer 1

1. Specialist foreperson
2. Reduce exemptions
3. Require reasons for decisions
4. A ‘not proven’ verdict

Question 2

Explain and evaluate the specialist foreperson reform.

Answer 2

The court could employ a permanent foreperson to guide the jury’s deliberations and represent them in court.

+ ensures jury is well-informed and applies correct points of law, more just decision

• judge may rely too heavily on foreperson, verdict may not accurately reflect jury/society
• foreperson may influence jury

Question 3

Explain and evaluate the reduction of exemptions reform.

Answer 3

To reduce the number of people who are exempt / disqualified from jury service
(eg; allowing public servants, prior criminals).

+ allows jury to represent more accurate cross section of society

• may allow unsuitable / biased people to serve on jury, resulting in unfair decision

Question 4

Explain and evaluate the reasons for verdict reform.

Answer 4

Would enable both parties to hear why they were successful / unsuccessful.

+ holds jurors accountable, prevents them from deciding on dubious grounds
+ Instills more confidence in legal system
+ provides accused with grounds for appeal

• difficult and time consuming for jurors to form synthesised reason for verdict
• jurors may be subject to scrutiny from public or the media for their reasoning

Question 5

Explain and evaluate the ‘not proven’ verdict reform.

Answer 5

To be used when the jury finds both the ‘innocent’ and ‘guilty’ verdicts unsuitable, but does not want to acquit the defendant. The defendant is released but may be retried if further evidence is found.

+ prevents jurors from settling for an unsuitable verdict
- may be unjust for the defendant, as they must live with possibility of future charges

Question 6

List 3 suggested alternatives to the jury system.

Answer 6

1. Trial by judge alone
2. Specialist jury
3. Professional jury

Question 7

Explain and evaluate the trial by judge alone alternative.

Answer 7

Involves a single judge (or panel of judges) using their expertise/qualifications to reach a verdict.

+ prevents incorrect decisions made by inexperienced jurors
+ reduce expenses and delays associated with jury empanelment process

• removes “trial by one’s peers” and prevents community involvement in legal system.

Question 8

Explain and evaluate the specialist jury alternative.

Answer 8

Juries would be specialised for each type of case
(eg; medical malpractice jury could consist of doctors)

+ ensures jury had expertise, understands complex evidence/terms, more just decision

• distances community from legal process, not true cross section of society
• would be expensive to pay such a panel

Question 9

Explain and evaluate the professional jury alternative.

Answer 9

Would consist of jurors employed specifically for that role.

+ jurors would develop expertise in their permanent role, understand complexities of law

• distances community from legal process, not true cross section of society
• may decrease independence / impartiality in the system, jurors could develop bias based on previous decisions